I've been a bit dissapointed in some of the ACR processed RAW files coming out of my Sony a700 and a900 and while Sony's own RAW converter seems to be a little bit better, it has so few features that it's almost useless.

I find C1 way superior to LR/ACR - however, I've heard but have nor yet personally checked that Aperture beats them all.I'll say no more as I believe Michael R. will have something to say on this subject in due course!Bill

If that's correct, I'd presume that Michael must be happy with ACR and LR for his new a900? I've read various posts in various places claiming that ACR does a poor job on Sony files. now I'm totaly confused because I can't see him using anything but the best.

If that's correct, I'd presume that Michael must be happy with ACR and LR for his new a900? I've read various posts in various places claiming that ACR does a poor job on Sony files. now I'm totaly confused because I can't see him using anything but the best.

He will be able to comment on that better, but could it be that your best differs from my best, which differs from Michael's best?

Yes we do Bernard, but some of us are better than others - meaning me! I've had a hard time transitioning from film to digital and in my mind, Michael is the Ansel Adams of digital IQ. His shots are actually better than Adams (for me) because they have soul, something I always felt that the big man lacked.

I understood working in the darkroom a lot more than I understand working in RAW. While I love Lightroom and working in ACR in LR makes sense to me, I'm not sure that it's kind to Sony RAW files. I have a feeling not.